Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (Diamond Sutra)

Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (also popularly known as the Diamond Sutra) is a Mahāyāna Buddhist sutra from the genre of Prajñāpāramitā (‘perfection of wisdom’) sutras. It is one of the most influential Mahayana sutras in East Asia, and it is particularly prominent within the Chan (or Zen) tradition, along with the Heart Sutra. Wikipedia

What is a Vajra?

The vajra is a legendary and ritualistic tool or “weapon”, symbolizing the properties of a diamond (indestructibility) and a thunderbolt (irresistible force). It is a round, symmetrical metal scepter with two ribbed spherical heads. The ribs may meet in a ball-shaped top, or they may be separate and end in sharp points. It is often paired with a bell (called ghanta).

For more information, see Vajra and Bell.

Vajra, Rubin Museum of Himalayan Art, Gift from the Collection of Jane Werner-Aye

Therefore it is no surprise that the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā (“Vajra Cutter Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra”) is considered one the most celebrated and historically significant works in Mahāyāna Buddhism.

Overview

This is a subversive sutra, for it “cuts” through “traditional” or “conservative” interpretations of the Buddha’s teachings, as represented by the Hīnayāna scriptures (the “lesser way”). It goes through a series of apparent contradictions discussed in dialogues between the Buddha and his disciple Subhūti. These dialogues demolish the idea of inherent existence, and shows that all phenomena are empty of a permanent, independent self-nature (śūnyatā). They also emphasise the importance of non-attachment and the practice of compassion towards all beings (because these beings are ultimately lacking in inherent existence as well, our perceptions of them are manifestations of ourselves).

It is important, however, to understand this sutra does not repudiate the so-called Hīnayāna texts. The concept of śūnyatā is consistent with the Buddha’s early teachings as represented in the Mahākhandhaka.

It is a fine line between understanding that everything we experience are mere perceptual constructs without inherent existence, and believing the “world is an illusion”. The former is taught by the Buddha, the latter is a common misunderstanding typical of translations of this and other Mahāyāna sutras. The sutra warns against this by emphasising the importance of compassion and altruistic action, even while recognising the emptiness of all phenomena.

Ultimately, complete liberation requires the liberation of all beings, as they are manifestations of ourselves. This is the main reason why everyone should aspire to be a Buddha and undertake the bodhisattva-way.

These contradictions discussed in the sutra include:

• The Buddha liberating other living beings - even though the concept of a “living being” is a mere perception (and therefore no actual living being is liberated).
• Perception of a ātmasaṃjñā (self), satvasaṃjñā (being), jīvasaṃjñā (life-force), pudgalasaṃjñā (person), or even dharma.
• Giving gifts without being based or dependent on any vastu (object), the five collections (skhandhas), dharmas (mental-objects/phenomena), or even nimittasaṃjñāyāṃ (perception of a sign). Gifts and acts of “kindness” must be intrinsically “good” and not attached to any perception of self, other, or phenomena.
• Perceiving the Buddha through his lakṣaṇasaṃpad (physical characteristics) or 32 marks.
• The effectiveness of the Buddha’s teachings in the future.
• The nature of ultimate enlightenment (anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ) and the nature of dharmas (phenomena).
• The “merit” of precious gifts compared to the “merit” of disseminating the teachings.
• The attainments of srotāpanna (stream-enterer), etc. up to arhat (worthy one). These are also empty of inherent substance.
• The understanding of dharma itself.
• dharmaparyāya (method of teaching).
• bhūtasaṃjñām (true perception) vs asaṃjñā (non-perception).
• ātmabhāvān (physical self)
• kṣetravyūhas (arrangement of field, possibly an epithet for establishing an “buudha field”).
• lokadhātus (world systems)
• cittadhārā (stream of thought)
• puṇyaskandha (mass of merit)
• rūpakāya (form-body)
• destruction and annihilation of phenomenon
• piṇḍagrāha (grasp of substance)
• ātmadṛṣṭi (view of self)
• dharmasaṃjñā (perception of phenomenon)

The sutra stresses that all the above concepts are ultimately empty of inherent existence, and that the bodhisattva-way is to be undertaken without attachment to any of these concepts.

Editions

To date, there has been ten published editions of this text in Sanskrit (plus many others in translation to languages such as Chinese, Japanese and Tibetan), according to Jens Braarvig, ed, Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection (III), Hermes, Oslo 2006:

1. F. Max Müller, ed., “Vagrakkhedikâ [= Vajracchedikā],” in Buddhist Texts From Japan (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Aryan Series Vol.1, Part 1), Oxford, 1881, pp. 15–46.
2. E. F. Pargiter, ed., “Vajracchedikā in the Original Sanskrit, Stein MS., No. D.III.13b,” in Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature Found in Eastern Turkestan, ed. by A. F. Rudolf Hoernle, Oxford, 1916, pp. 176–195.
3. N. P. Chakravarti, ed., “The Gilgit Text of the Vajracchedikā,” in Minor Buddhist Texts (SOR IX.1), ed. by G. Tucci, Rome, 1956, pp. 173–192.
4. E. Conze, ed., Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā, Edited and Translated with Introduction and Glossary (SOR XIII), Rome, 1957. 2nd edition, with Corrections and Additions, Rome, 1974.
5. N. Dutt, ed., Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. VI, Calcutta, 1959. Reprint: Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica 24, Delhi, 1984, pp. 139–170.
6. P. L. Vaidya, ed., “Vajracchedikā nāma Triśatikā Prajñāpāramitā,” in Mahāyāna-sūtra- saṃgraha, Part 1 (BST 17), Darbhanga, 1961, pp. 75–89.
7. L. M. Joshi, Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitāsūtra with the Commentary of Asaṃga, Critically edited and translated into Hindi with Introduction, Notes and Glossary (Bibliotheca Indo- Tibetica 3), Varanasi, 1978.
8. G. Schopen, “The Manuscript of the Vajracchedikā Found at Gilgit,” in Studies in the Literature of the Great Vehicle: Three Mahāyāna Buddhist Texts, ed. by L. O. Gómez and J. Silk, Ann Arbor, 1989, pp. 89–13
9. Rushi foxue yanjiushi , ed. Jingang boruo boluomi jing , 5 vols., Taipei, 1995–1996. The edition of the Sanskrit text occupies Vol. 3, pp. 1–64.
10. P. Harrison & S. Watanabe, “Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā” in Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection (III), ed. by J. Braarvig, Hermes, Oslo 2006, pp. 89-132.
11. P. Harrison, “Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā: A New English Translation of the Sanskrit Text Based on Two Manuscripts from Greater Gandhāra” in Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection (III), ed. by J. Braarvig, Hermes, Oslo 2006, pp. 133-159.

The following is my translation of this text, based on two separate manuscripts (corresponding to editions 8 and 10 above):

• Schøyen Collection MS2385, presumed to have come from Afghanistan, possibly the Bamiyan area, and is dated on paleographical grounds to the 6th–7th CE. It preserves roughly the first half of the text, in a continuous run over fols. 26–46 (corrresponding to §§1–16c).
• Gilgit Vajracchedikā, discovered in Northern Pakistan in 1931, and subsequently edited by Schopen (1989), also dated to approximately 6th–7th CE. It preserves the last two thirds, on fols. 5–12, but with the loss of one folio, No. 6 (thus covering §§13b–14e, 15b–32b).

Together, there is enough overlap and similarities between the two manuscripts to create a “Frankenstein” edition of the entire sutra (combining the two manuscripts) that gives an indication of the form in which the sutra was circulating in the area of Greater Gandhāra in the 6th and 7th centuries A.D.

As an alternative, Alex Johnson created the Diamond Sutra website and composite translation by taking 15 different previous translations of the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (presumably from Chinese editions). Every element that was common through each of the translations was kept.

Venerable Lian Sheng has also created a translation of the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra and commentary in The Vajra Sutra based on (presumably) a Chinese edition.

Schøyen Collection MS2385

§1

Translation

Homage to Śākyamuni, the tathāgata (Thus-gone), the arhat (Worthy One), the samyaksaṃbuddha (Perfectly and Completely Awake One).

Thus have I heard. At one time the Bhagavān was dwelling in Śrāvastī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s park, together with a great assembly of monks (bhikṣusaṃghena), with twelve hundred and fifty monks.

Then, the Bhagavān, in the forenoon, having put on his lower robe, taking his bowl and upper robe, entered the great city of Śrāvastī for alms. Then, the Bhagavān, having wandered for alms in the great city of Śrāvastī, having returned from the alms-round after the meal, washed his feet, and the Bhagavān sat down on the prepared seat, folding his legs cross-wise, holding his body erect, establishing mindfulness (smṛtim) before him. Then many bhikṣavaḥ approached where the Bhagavān was. Having approached, they bowed their heads to the Bhagavān’s feet, circumambulated the Bhagavān three times, and sat down to one side.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

namo śākyamunaye tathāgatāyārhate samyaksaṃbuddhāya | ||

evaṃ mayā śrutam ekasmin samaye bhagavān | śrāvastyāṃ viharati sma | jetavane | anāthapiṇḍadasyārāme mahatā bhikṣusaṃghena sārdham ardhatrayodaśabhir bhikṣuśataiḥ |

atha khalu bhagavān pūrvāhṇakālasamaye nivāsya pātracīvaram ādāya | śrāvastīṃ mahānagarīṃ piṇḍāya prāviśat | atha khalu bhagavān | śrāvastīṃ mahānagarīṃ piṇḍāya caritvā paścādbhaktapiṇḍapātapratikkrāṃtaḥ pādau prakṣālya nyaṣīdad bhagavān | prajñapta evāsane paryaṃkam ābhujya ṛjuṃ kāyaṃ praṇidhāya pratimukhaṃ smṛtim upasthāpya | atha saṃbahulā bhikṣavaḥ yena bhagavāṃs tenopasaṃkkraman upasaṃkkramya bhagavataḥ pādau śirasābhivandya bhagavaṃtaṃ tṛḥpradakṣiṇīkṛtvā ekāṃte nyaṣīdan |

§2

Translation

Now at that time, the āyuṣmān Subhūti was present in that very assembly, seated. Then the āyuṣmān Subhūti rose from his seat, arranged his upper robe over one shoulder, placed his right knee-circle on the ground, extended his folded hands toward the Bhagavān, and said this to the Bhagavān:

Wonderful, Bhagavān, to what extent the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha has favoured the bodhisattvas (enlightenment-beings), the mahāsattvas (great-beings), with the highest favour! To what extent the tathāgata has entrusted the bodhisattvas with the highest entrustment! How, Bhagavān, should one who has set out in the bodhisattva-way (bodhisatvayāna) stand? How should they train? How should they control their mind (citta)?

This having been said, the Bhagavān said this to the āyuṣmān Subhūti:

Good, good, Subhūti! It is just so, Subhūti. The tathāgata has favored the bodhisattvas with the highest favour. The tathāgata has entrusted the bodhisattvas with the highest entrustment. Therefore, Subhūti, listen well and properly bear it in mind. I will explain how one who has set out in the bodhisattva-way should stand, how they should train, and how they should control their mind.

“So be it, Bhagavān,” the āyuṣmān Subhūti replied to the Bhagavān.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tena khalu punaḥ samayenāyuṣmān subhūtiḥ tasyām eva pariṣadi sannipatito ’bhūt sanniṣaṇṇaḥ | atha khalv āyuṣmān subhūtir utthāyāsanād ekāṃsam uttarāsaṃgaṃ kṛtvā dakṣiṇaṃ jānumaṇḍalaṃ pṛthivyāṃ pratiṣṭhāpya yena bhagavāṃs tenāṃjaliṃ praṇāmya bhagavaṃtam etad avocat | āścaryaṃ bhagavan yāvad eva tathāgatenārhatā samyaksaṃbuddhena bodhisatvā mahāsatvā anuparigṛhītāḥ parameṇānugraheṇa | yāvad eva tathāgatena bodhisatvāḥ parittāḥ paramayā parindanayā | kathaṃ bhagavan bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitena sthātavyam | kathaṃ pratipattavyam | kathaṃ cittaṃ pratigṛhītavyam | evam ukte bhagavān āyuṣmaṃtaṃ subhūtim etad avocat | sādhu sādhu subhūte evam etat subhūte anuparigṛhītās tathāgatena bodhisatvāḥ parameṇānugraheṇa | parittās tathāgatena bodhisatvāḥ paramayānuparindanayā | tena hi subhūte śṛṇu sādhu ca suṣṭhu ca manasikuru bhāṣiṣye | yathā bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitena sthātavyam | yathā pratipattavyam | yathā cittaṃ pratigṛhītavyam | evaṃ bhagavann ity āyuṣmān subhūtir bhagavataḥ pratyaśrauṣīt |

§3

Translation

The Bhagavān said this to them:

Here, Subhūti, those who have set out in the bodhisattva-way should produce this thought:

‘However many beings (satvāḥ) are included in the collection of beings — whether egg-born, or womb-born, or moisture-born, or spontaneously-born; whether having form or formless; whether having perception (saṃjñino), or non-perceiving (asaṃjñino), or neither-perceiving-nor-non-perceiving; as far as any conceivable realm of beings (satvadhātuḥ) is conceived — all these I must lead to parinirvāṇa (complete extinguishment) in the realm of nirvāṇa (extinguishment) that leaves no remainder (anupadhiśeṣe nirvāṇadhātau).’

However, although immeasurable beings are led to parinirvāṇa, not a single being whatsoever has been led to parinirvāṇa.

Why is that? If, Subhūti, a perception of a being (satvasaṃjñā) should occur to a bodhisattva, he should not be called a bodhisattva. Why is that? He should not be called a bodhisattva, Subhūti, for whom a perception of a being (satvasaṃjñā) should occur, or a perception of a life-force (jīvasaṃjñā), or a perception of a person (pudgalasaṃjñā).

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

bhagavāṃs tān etad avocat | iha subhūte bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitair evaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | yāvaṃtaḥ satvāḥ satvasaṃgraheṇa saṃgṛhītāḥ aṇḍajā vā jarāyujā vā saṃsvedajā vā upapādukā vā rūpiṇo vā arūpiṇo vā saṃjñino vā asaṃjñino vā naiva saṃjñino nāsaṃjñinaḥ yāvat satvadhātuḥ prajñapyamānaḥ prajñapyate te mayā sarve anupadhiśeṣe nirvāṇadhātau parinirvāpayitavyāḥ | evam aparimāṇāṃś ca satvān parinirvāpayitavyāḥ na ca kaścit satvaḥ parinirvāpito bhavati | tat kasmād dhetoḥ | sacet subhūte bodhisatvasya satvasaṃjñā pravartate na sa bodhisatva iti vaktavyaḥ | tat kasya hetoḥ | na sa subhūte bodhisatvo vaktavyo yasya satvasaṃjñā pravarteta jīvasaṃjñā vā pudgalasaṃjñā vā pravarteta |

§4

Translation

Furthermore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should give a gift without being established or based in a vastu (object). They should give a gift without it being based on anything. They should give a gift without it being based in form, nor in sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, nor should they give a gift based on dharmas (mental-objects/phenomena). Even further, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should give a gift, in such a way that it is not based on even the perception of a sign (nimittasaṃjñāyāṃ).

Why is that? The bodhisattva, Subhūti, who gives a gift independent of the above — it is not easy, Subhūti, to grasp the measure of their store of merit (puṇyaskandhasya).

What do you think, Subhūti? Is it easy to grasp the measure of space in the eastern direction?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

Bhagavān said:

Likewise in the southern, western, northern directions, below, above, in the intermediate and non-intermediate directions, in the ten directions, is it easy to grasp the measure of space?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

Bhagavān said:

Just so, Subhūti, just so. For the bodhisattva who gives a non-dependent gift, it is not easy to grasp the measure of their store of merit. Furthermore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should give a gift just so, as this foundation of meritorious action which consists of giving.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte bodhisatvena na vastupratiṣṭhitena dānaṃ dātavyam | na kvacitpratiṣṭhitena dānaṃ dātavyam | na rūpapratiṣṭhitena dānaṃ dātavyaṃ na śabdagandharasaspraṣṭavyeṣu na dharmapratiṣṭhitena dānaṃ dātavyam | evaṃ hi subhūte bodhisatvena dānaṃ dātavyam | yathā na nimittasaṃjñāyāṃ pratitiṣṭhet | tat kasya hetoḥ | yaḥ subhūte bodhisatvaḥ apratiṣṭhito dānaṃ dadāti tasya subhūte puṇyaskandhasya na sukaraṃ pramāṇam udgrahītum | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte sukaraṃ pūrvasyāṃ diśi ākāśasya pramāṇam udgrahītum | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | evaṃ dakṣiṇapaścimottarāsv adha ūrdhvaṃ vidikṣu-r-avidikṣu | daśasu dikṣu | sukaram ākāśasya pramāṇam udgrahītum | subhūtir āha | na hīdaṃ bhagavan | bhagavān āha | evam etat subhūte | evam etat subhūte yo bodhisatvo ’pratiṣṭhito dānaṃ dadāti tasya puṇyaskandhasya na sukaraṃ pramāṇam udgrahītum | api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte evaṃ bodhisatvena dānamayaṃ puṇyakṛyāvastuṃ dānaṃ dātavyam |

§5

Translation

What do you think, Subhūti? Is the tathāgata to be seen by the perfection of his “marks” (physical characteristics) (lakṣaṇasaṃpadā)?

Bhagavān said:

The tathāgata is not to be seen by the perfection of marks. Why is that? That which was taught by the tathāgata as the perfection of marks, that is itself the perfection of no-marks.

This having been said, the Bhagavān said this to the āyuṣmān Subhūti:

Insofar, Subhūti, as there is a mark, it is false. Insofar as there is no-mark, it is not false. Thus, the tathāgata is to be seen from marks and no-marks.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte tathāgato lakṣaṇasaṃpadā draṣṭavyaḥ | bhagavān āha na lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ | tat kasya hetoḥ | yā sā tathāgatena lakṣaṇasaṃpad bhāṣitā saivālakṣaṇasaṃpat | evam ukte bhagavān āyuṣmaṃtaṃ subhūtim etad avocat | yāvat subhūte lakṣaṇaṃ tāvan mṛṣā | yāvad alakṣaṇaṃ tāvad amṛṣā | iti hi lakṣaṇālakṣaṇataḥ tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ ||

§6

Translation

This having been said, the āyuṣmān Subhūti said this to the Bhagavān:

Will there be, Bhagavān, any beings in the future time, in the final five-hundred-year period, who, when these sutra-passages are being taught, will produce a true perception (bhūtasaṃjñām)?

The Bhagavān said:

Do not speak thus, Subhūti. There will be beings in the future time who, when these sutra-passages are being taught, will produce a true perception. Furthermore, Subhūti, there will be in the future time, in the final five-hundred-year period, when the good dharma (teaching) is disappearing, bodhisattvas, mahāsattvas who are virtuous (śīlavaṃto), endowed with qualities (guṇavaṃtaḥ), and endowed with wisdom (prajñāvaṃto).

Moreover, Subhūti, those bodhisattvas will not have served only one Buddha. They will not have planted roots of goodness (kuśalamūlā) under only one Buddha. Furthermore, Subhūti, they will have served many Buddhas, they will have planted roots of goodness under many Buddhas. They are the ones who, when these sutra-passages are being taught, will obtain a single moment of clear tranquility (ekacittaprasādamātram).

They are known, Subhūti, by the tathāgata; they are seen, Subhūti, by the tathāgata. All of them will produce and receive an immeasurable store of merit (puṇyaskaṃdhaṃ). Why is that? Because, Subhūti, for those bodhisattvas, a perception of self (ātmasaṃjñā) will not occur, nor a perception of a being (satvasaṃjñā), nor a perception of a life-force (jīvasaṃjñā), nor a perception of a person (pudgalasaṃjñā). Nor for those bodhisattvas, Subhūti, will a perception of dharma (phenomenon) occur, nor a perception of non-dharma. Nor will perception (saṃjñā) or non-perception (asaṃjñā) occur to them.

Why is that? If, Subhūti, a perception of dharma were to occur for those bodhisattvas, that itself would be for them a grasping at self (ātmagrāho), a grasping at a being, a grasping at a life-force, a grasping at a person. If a perception of non-dharma were to occur, that itself would be for them a grasping at self, a grasping at a being, a grasping at a life-force, a grasping at a person.

Why is that? Because, Subhūti, a dharma is not to be grasped, nor a non-dharma. Therefore, with this in mind, it was taught by the tathāgata: ‘By those who know the “Simile of the Raft” teaching (dharmaparyāyaṃ), dharmas themselves must be abandoned, how much more so non-dharmas.’

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

evam ukte āyuṣmān subhūtir bhagavaṃtam etad avocat | asti bhagavan kecit satvāḥ bhaviṣyaṃty anāgate ’dhvani paścimāyāṃ paṃcāśatyāṃ vartamānāyāṃ ye imeṣv evaṃrūpeṣu sūtrāṃtapadeṣu bhāṣyamāṇeṣu bhūtasaṃjñām utpādayiṣyaṃti | bhagavān āha | mā tvaṃ subhūte evaṃ vocat | asti kecit satvāḥ bhaviṣyaṃty anāgate ’dhvani ye imeṣv evaṃrūpeṣu sūtrāṃtapadeṣu bhāṣyamāṇeṣu bhūtasaṃjñām utpādayiṣyaṃti | api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte bhaviṣyaṃty anāgate ’dhvani bodhisatvā mahāsatvā paścimāyāṃ paṃcāśatyāṃ saddharmavipralope vartamāne śīlavaṃto guṇavaṃtaḥ prajñāvaṃto bhaviṣyaṃti | na khalu punaḥ subhūte bodhisatvā ekabuddhaparyupāsitā bhaviṣyaṃti | naikabuddhāvaropitakuśalamūlā bhaviṣyaṃti | api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte anekabuddhaparyupāsitā bhaviṣyaṃti anekabuddhāvaropitakuśalamūlā bhaviṣyaṃti | ye imeṣv evaṃrūpeṣu sūtrāṃtapadeṣu bhāṣyamāṇeṣv ekacittaprasādamātram api pratilapsyaṃte | jñātās te subhūte tathāgatena dṛṣṭās te subhūte tathāgatena sarve te aprameyaṃ puṇyaskaṃdhaṃ prasaviṣyaṃti pratigṛhīṣyaṃti | tat kasya hetoḥ | na hi teṣāṃ subhūte bodhisatvānāṃm ātmasaṃjñā pravartsyate na satvasaṃjñā na jīvasaṃjñā na pudgalasaṃjñā pravartsyate | nāpi teṣāṃ subhūte bodhisatvānāṃ dharmasaṃjñā pravartsyate nādharmasaṃjñā nāpi teṣāṃ saṃjñā nāsaṃjñā pravartsyate | tat kasya hetoḥ | sacet subhūte teṣāṃ bodhisatvānāṃ dharmasaṃjñā pravartsyate sa eva teṣām ātmagrāho bhavet | satvagrāho jīvagrāhaḥ pudgalagrāho bhavet | saced adharmasaṃjñā pravarteta sa eva teṣām ātmagrāho bhavet | satvagrāho jīvagrāhaḥ pudgalagrāha iti | tat kasya hetoḥ | na khalu punaḥ subhūte dharmodgrahītavyo nādharmaḥ | tasmād idaṃ saṃndhāya tathāgatena bhāṣitaṃ kolopamaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃm ājānadbhiḥ dharmāḥ eva prahātavyāḥ prāg evādharmāḥ ||

§7

Translation

Furthermore, the Bhagavān said this to the āyuṣmān Subhūti:

What do you think, Subhūti? Was any anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ (unexcelled, perfect, complete enlightenment) fully awakened to by the tathāgata? Or was any dharma (teaching) taught by the tathāgata?

Subhūti said:

As I understand the meaning of the Bhagavān’s teaching, Bhagavān, there is no dharma whatsoever that was fully awakened to by the tathāgata as anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ. There is no dharma whatsoever that was taught by the tathāgata. Why is that? That dharma taught by the tathāgata — it is ungraspable, inexpressible. It is neither dharma nor non-dharma. Why is that? Because the “noble” (liberated) persons (āryapudgalāḥ) are distinguished by the unconstructed (asaṃskṛta).

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

punar aparaṃ bhagavān āyuṣmaṃtaṃ subhūtim etad avocat | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte kācit tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhā | kaścid vā dharmas tathāgatena deśitaḥ || subhūtir āha | yathāhaṃ bhagavan bhagavato bhāṣitasyārtham ājānāmi nāsti sa kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhā | nāsti sa kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatena deśitaḥ | tat kasya hetoḥ | yo ’sau tathāgatena dharmo deśitaḥ | agrāhyaḥ so ’nabhilapyaḥ | na sa dharmo nādharmaḥ | tat kasya hetoḥ | asaṃskṛtaprabhāvitā hy āryapudgalāḥ |

§8

Translation

What do you think, Subhūti? If some son or daughter of good family were to fill this three-thousand-great-thousand world-system (tṛsāhasramahāsāhasrāṃ lokadhātuṃ) with the seven precious jewels and give it as a gift — what do you think, Subhūti? Would that son or daughter of good family produce much merit (puṇyaṃ)?

Subhūti said:

Much, Bhagavān, much, sugata. That son or daughter of good family would produce much merit. Why is that? That merit, Bhagavān, is a non-collection (askandhaḥ). Therefore the tathāgata speaks of the ‘store of merit’ (puṇyaskandhaḥ) as ‘non-store’.

The Bhagavān said:

And yet, Subhūti, if a son or daughter of good family were to fill this three-thousand-great-thousand world-system with the seven precious jewels and give it as a gift, and if another were to take from this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) even just a four-line verse (gāthām), teach it to others, and illuminate it — this latter one would produce far more merit on that account, immeasurable, incalculable.

Why is that? Because from this, Subhūti, is born the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ of the tathāgatas. And from this are born the Buddhas, the Bhagavāns. Why is that? ‘Buddha-dharmas’, ‘Buddha-dharmas’, Subhūti — they are indeed non-Buddha-dharmas.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte ya imāṃ tṛsāhasramahāsāhasrāṃ lokadhātuṃ saptaratnapratipūrṇaṃ kṛtvā dānaṃ dadyāt | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nu sa kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasunuyāt | subhūtir āha | bahu bhagavan bahu sugata | sa kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasunuyāt | tat kasya hetoḥ | sa eva bhagavann askandhaḥ | tasmāt tathāgato bhāṣate puṇyaskandhaḥ askandha iti bhagavān āha | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā imāṃ tṛsāhasrāmahāsāhasrāṃ lokadhātuṃ saptaratnapratipūrṇaṃ kṛtvā dānaṃ dadyāt | yaś ceto dharmaparyāyad aṃtaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya parebhyo deśayet saṃprakāśayed ayam eva tatonidānaṃ bahutaraṃ puṇyaṃ prasunuyāt | aprameyam asaṃkhyeyaṃ | tat kasya hetoḥ | ato nirjātā hi subhūte tathāgatānām anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ | ato nirjātāś ca buddhā bhagavaṃtaḥ | tat kasmād dhetoḥ | buddhadharmāḥ buddhadharmā iti subhūte abuddhadharmāś caiva te |

§9

Translation

What do you think, Subhūti? Does it occur to a srotāpanna (stream-enterer) ‘The fruit of stream-entry has been attained by me’?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

The Bhagavān said:

Why is that? Because, Bhagavān, he has not entered anything. Therefore he is called a ‘stream-enterer’. He has not entered form, nor sounds, nor smells, nor tastes, nor tangibles, nor dharmas. Therefore he is called a ‘stream-enterer’.

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? Does it occur to a sakṛdāgāmin (once-returner) ‘The fruit of once-returning has been attained by me’?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

The Bhagavān said:

Why is that? It does not occur to a sakṛdāgāmin, ‘The fruit of once-returning has been attained by me.’ Why is that? Because there is no dharma whatsoever that has attained ‘once-returning’. Therefore he is called a ‘once-returner’.

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? Does it occur to an anāgāmin (non-returner) ‘The fruit of non-returning has been attained by me’? Why is that? Because there is no dharma whatsoever that he perceives as ‘non-returner’. Therefore he is called a ‘non-returner’.

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? Does it occur to an arhat (worthy one) ‘Arhatship has been attained by me’?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān. Why is that? Because, Bhagavān, there is no dharma whatsoever that is named ‘arhat’. If, Bhagavān, it were to occur to an arhat ‘Arhatship has been attained by me,’ that itself would be for him a grasping at self (ātmagrāho), a grasping at a being, a grasping at a life-force, a grasping at a person.

I am, Bhagavān, designated by the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha, as the foremost of those who dwell in peace (araṇavihāriṇām). I am, Bhagavān, an arhat, free from passion. And yet, Bhagavān, it does not occur to me ‘I am an arhat’. If, Bhagavān, it were to occur to me ‘Arhatship has been attained by me,’ the tathāgata would not have declared of me:

‘Subhūti, son of good family, foremost of those who dwell in peace (araṇāvihārinām), dwells nowhere. Therefore he is called a “dweller in peace,” a “dweller in peace”.’

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte | api nu srotāpannasya evaṃ bhavati mayā srotāpattiphalaṃ prāptam iti | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | bhagavān āha | tat kasya hetoḥ | na hi sa bhagavan kiṃcid āpannaḥ | tenocyate srotāpanna iti | na rūpam āpanno na śabdān na gandhān na rasān na spraṣṭavyān na dharmān āpannaḥ | tenocyate srotāpanna iti |

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nu sakṛdāgāminaḥ evaṃ bhaven mayā sakṛdā- gāmiphalaṃ prāptam iti | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | bhagavān āha | tat kasya hetoḥ | na sakṛdāgāmino evaṃ bhavati mayā sakṛdāgāmiphalaṃ prāptam iti | tat kasmād dhetoḥ | na hi sa kaścid dharmaḥ yaḥ sakṛdāgāmitvam āpannaḥ | tenocyate sakṛdāgāmīti |

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nv anāgāmina evaṃ bhavati mayā anāgāmiphalaṃ prāptam iti | tat kasya hetoḥ | na sa kaścid dharmaḥ yo ’nāgāmīti | samanupaśyati | tenocyate anāgāmīti |

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte | api nv arhato evaṃ bhavati mayārhatvaṃ prāptam iti | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | tat kasya hetoḥ | na hi bhagavan sa kaścid dharmo yo ’rhan nāmaḥ | saced bhagavann arhata evaṃ bhaven mayārhatvaṃ prāptam iti | sa eva tasyātmagrāho bhavet | satvagrāho jīvagrāhaḥ pudgalagrāho bhavet |

aham asmi bhagavan | || tathāgatenārhatā samyaksaṃbuddhenāraṇavihāriṇām agryo nirdiṣṭaḥ | aham asmi bhagavann arhan vigatarāgaḥ | na ca me bhagavann evaṃ bhavati aham asmi arhann iti | sacen mama bhagavann evaṃ bhaven mayārhatvaṃ prāptam iti | na me tathāgato vyākariṣyati | araṇāvihārinām agrya iti subhūtiḥ | kulaputro na kvacid viharati | tenocyate | araṇāvihārīti araṇāvihārīti |

§10

Translation

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? Was any dharma whatsoever grasped by the tathāgata from Dīpaṃkara, the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

The Bhagavān said:

No dharma whatsoever was grasped by the tathāgata from Dīpaṃkara, the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha.

The Bhagavān said:

If any bodhisattva, Subhūti, should say ‘I will bring to perfection the adornments of a Buddha-field (kṣetravyūhān)’, he would speak falsely. Why is that? ‘Field-adornments’, ‘field-adornments’, Subhūti—these have been taught by the tathāgata as non-adornments (avyūhā). Therefore they are called ‘field-adornments’.

Therefore, then, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should produce an unestablished (apratiṣṭhitaṃ) thought. A thought should be produced that is not established in form. A thought should be produced that is not established in sound, smell, taste, tangibles, or dharmas. A thought should be produced that is not established anywhere.

Suppose, Subhūti, there were a man whose self-existence (ātmabhāvaḥ) was of such a form as Sumeru, king of mountains. What do you think, Subhūti? Would that self-existence be great?

Subhūti said:

Great, Bhagavān, great, sugata, would that self-existence be, Bhagavān. Why is that? It has been taught by the tathāgata as non-existence (abhāvaḥ). Therefore it is called ‘self-existence’. For it is not an existence. Therefore it is called ‘self-existence’.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte | kaścid dharmas tathāgatena dīpaṃkarāt tathāgatād arhataḥ samyaksaṃbuddhād udgṛhītaḥ | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | bhagavān āha | na sa kaścid dharmaḥ tathāgatena dīpaṃkarāt tathāgatād arhataḥ samyaksaṃbuddhād udgṛhītaḥ |

bhagavān āha | yaḥ kaścit subhūte bodhisatvo evaṃ vaded ahaṃ kṣetravyūhān niṣpādayiṣyāmīti sa vitathaṃ vadet | tat kasya hetoḥ | kṣetravyūhāḥ kṣetravyūhā iti subhūte avyūhā hy ete tathāgatena bhāṣitāḥ | tenocyaṃte kṣetravyūhā iti |

tasmāt tarhi subhūte bodhisatvena evaṃ cittam utpādayitavyaṃ apratiṣṭhitaṃ | na rūpapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyaṃ | na śabdagandharasaspraṣṭavyadharmapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | na kvacitpratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | tad yathāpi nāma subhūte puruṣo bhavet | yasyaivaṃrūpa ātmabhāvaḥ syāt tad yathāpi nāma sumeruḥ parvatarājā | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte mahān sa ātmabhāvo bhavet | subhūtir āha | mahān bhagava∫ mahān sugata | sa ātmabhāvo bhavet | bhagavan | tat kasya hetoḥ | abhāvaḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | tenocyate ātmabhāva iti | na hi sa bhāvaḥ | tenocyate ātmabhāva iti | ||

§11

Translation

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? If there were as many Ganges rivers as there are grains of sand in the Ganges river, would the grains of sand in them be many?

Subhūti said:

hose Ganges rivers themselves, Bhagavān, would be many — how much more so the grains of sand in them!

The Bhagavān said:

I declare to you, Subhūti, I announce to you: As many as the grains of sand in those Ganges rivers, if there were that many world-systems (lokadhātavaḥ), and some woman or man were to fill them with the seven precious jewels and give them as a gift to the tathāgatas, the arhats, the samyaksaṃbuddhas…

What do you think, Subhūti? Would that woman or man produce much merit (puṇyaṃ) on that account?

Subhūti said:

Much, Bhagavān, much, sugata. That woman or man would produce much merit on that account.

The Bhagavān said:

And yet, Subhūti, if someone were to fill that many world-systems with the seven precious jewels and give them as a gift, and if another were to take from this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) even just a four-line verse (gāthām) and teach it to others — this one would produce far more merit on that account, immeasurable, incalculable.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte yāvaṃtyo gaṃgānadyāṃ vālukās tāvaṃtya eva gaṃgānadyo bhaveyuḥ | api nu tāsu bahvyo vālukā bhaveyuḥ | subhūtir āha | tā eva tāvad bhagavan bahvyo gaṃgānadyo bhaveyuḥ prāg eva yās tāsu vālukāḥ | bhagavān āha | ārocayāmi te subhūte prativedayāmi te yāvaṃtyas tāsu gaṃgānadīṣu vālukā bhaveyuḥ | tāvaṃtyo lokadhātavaḥ kaścid eva strī vā puruṣo vā saptaratnapratipūrṇaṃ kṛtvā tathāgatebhyo ’rhadbhyaḥ samyaksaṃbuddhebhyo dānaṃ dadyāt | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte | api nu sā strī vā puruṣo vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasunuyāt | subhūtir āha | bahu bhagavan bahu sugata | sā strī vā puruṣo vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasunuyāt | bhagavān āha | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte tāvaṃtyo lokadhātavaḥ saptaratnapratipūrṇaṃ kṛtvā dānaṃ dadyāt | yaś ceto dharmaparyāyād aṃtaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya parebhyo deśayet | ayaṃ tato bahutaraṃ puṇyaṃ prasunuyād aprameyam asaṃkhyeyam |

§12

Translation

Furthermore, Subhūti, whatever spot of earth where from this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) even just a four-line verse is spoken or taught, that spot of earth would become like a caitya (shrine), worthy of worship by the world with its gods, humans, and asuras. How much more so, Subhūti, those who will uphold this dharmaparyāya! They will be endowed with the highest wonder. And in that spot of earth, the Teacher dwells, or someone else who is in the position of a guru.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

api tu khalu subhūte yasmin pṛthivīpradeśe ito dharmaparyāyād aṃtaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthāṃ bhāṣyeta vā deśyeta vā sa pṛthivīpradeśaś caityabhūto bhavet | sadevamānuṣāsurasya lokasya kaḥ punar vādaḥ subhūte ya imaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃ dhārayiṣyaṃti parameṇa te āścaryeṇa samanvāgatā bhaviṣyaṃti | tasmiṃś ca pṛthivīpradeśe śāstā viharaty anyatarānyataro vā gurusthānīyaḥ |

§13

Translation

This having been said, the āyuṣmān Subhūti said this to the Bhagavān:

What is the name of this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching), Bhagavān? And how should I remember it?

This having been said, the Bhagavān said this to the āyuṣmān Subhūti:

‘Perfection of Wisdom’ (prajñāpāramitā) is the name of this dharmaparyāya, Subhūti. And thus you should remember it. Why is that? The very prajñāpāramitā, Subhūti, which was taught by the tathāgata, that is a non-perfection (apāramitā).

What do you think, Subhūti? Is there any dharma whatsoever that was taught by the tathāgata?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān.

There is no dharma whatsoever, Bhagavān, that was taught by the tathāgata.

Bhagavān said:

As much dust of the earth (pṛthivīrajaḥ) as there is in the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system, Subhūti — would that be much?

Subhūti said:

Much, Bhagavān, would that earth-dust be.

Bhagavān said:

That which, Bhagavān, was taught as ‘earth-dust’ by the tathāgata, as ‘non-dust’ (arajaḥ) it was taught by the tathāgata. Therefore it is called ‘earth-dust’. That which is the ‘world-system’ (lokadhātur), as ‘non-system’ (adhātuḥ) it was taught by the tathāgata. Therefore it is called ‘world-system’.

The Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti? Is the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha, to be seen by the thirty-two marks of a great man (mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇaiḥ)?

Subhūti said:

No indeed, Bhagavān. Why is that? Because those thirty-two marks of a great man that were taught by the tathāgata, Bhagavān, were taught by the tathāgata as non-marks (alakṣaṇāni). Therefore they are called ‘the thirty-two marks of a great man’.

The Bhagavān said:

And yet, Subhūti, if a woman or man were to renounce self-existences (ātmabhāvān) equal to the grains of sand in the Ganges river, and if another were to take from this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) even a four-line verse (gāthām) and teach it to others — this one would produce far more merit on that account, immeasurable, incalculable.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

evam ukte āyuṣmān subhūtir bhagavaṃtam etad avocat | ko nāmāyaṃ bhagavan dharmaparyāyaḥ kathaṃ cainaṃ dhārayāmi | evam ukte bhagavān āyuṣmaṃtaṃ subhūtim etad avocat | prajñāpāramitā nāmāyaṃ subhūte dharmaparyāyaḥ | evaṃ cainaṃ dhāraya | tat kasya hetoḥ | yaiva subhūte prajñāpāramitā tathāgatena bhāṣitā | saivāpāramitā |

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nu sa kaścid dharmo tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | | na sa kaścid bhagavaṃ dharmo yaḥ tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ |

yāvataḥ subhūte tṛsāhasramahāsāhasryāṃ lokadhātau pṛthivīrajaḥ kaccit tad bahu bhavet | subhūtir āha | bahu bhagavans tat pṛthivīrajo bhavet | yat tad bhagavan | pṛthivīrajaḥ tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ arajaḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | tad ucyate pṛthivīraja iti | yā sā lokadhātur adhātuḥ sā tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | tad ucyate lokadhātur iti | ||

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte dvātṛṃśadbhir mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇaiḥ tathāgato ’rhan samyaksaṃbuddho draṣṭavyaḥ | subhūtir āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan | tat kasya hetoḥ | yāni tāni bhagavan dvātṛṃśanmahāpuruṣalakṣaṇāni tathāgatena bhāṣitāny alakṣaṇāni tathāgatena bhāṣitāni tasmād ucyaṃte dvātṛṃśanmahāpuruṣalakṣaṇānīti |

bhagavān āha | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte strī vā puruṣo vā gaṃgānadīvālukopamān ātmabhāvān parityajet | yaś ceto dharmaparyāyāc catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya parebhyo deśayet | ayaṃ tatonidānaṃ bahutaraṃ puṇyaṃ prasunuyād aprameyam asaṃkhyeyam |

§14

Translation

Then, the āyuṣmān Subhūti, moved by the dharma, shed tears. Wiping away his tears, he said this to the Bhagavān:

Wonderful, Bhagavān! Supremely wonderful, sugata! What an extent this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) has been taught by the tathāgata! From which, Bhagavān, knowledge (jñānam) has arisen in me. Never before have I heard such a dharmaparyāya. They will be endowed, Bhagavān, with the highest wonder, who, when this sūtra is being taught, will produce a true perception (bhūtasaṃjñām). And this ‘true perception’, Bhagavān — that is itself a non-perception (asaṃjñā). Therefore the tathāgata speaks of ‘bhūtasaṃjñām, bhūtasaṃjñām’.

It is no wonder to me, Bhagavān, that I understand and accept this dharmaparyāya as it is being taught. But those, Bhagavān, who will take up, master, and uphold this dharmaparyāya — they will be endowed with the highest wonder.

Furthermore, Bhagavān, a perception of self (ātmasaṃjñā) will not occur to them, nor a perception of a being, nor a perception of a life-force, nor a perception of a person. Why is that? Because that ‘perception of self’ is itself a non-perception. That ‘perception of a being’, ‘perception of a life-force’, ‘perception of a person’ — that is itself a non-perception. Why is that? Because the Buddhas, the Bhagavāns, are free from all perceptions.

This having been said, the Bhagavān said this to the āyuṣmān Subhūti:

Just so, Subhūti, just so. Those beings will be endowed with the highest wonder, who, upon hearing this sūtra being taught, will not be terrified, will not be frightened, will not fall into terror. Why is that? This is the highest perfection (paramapāramitā), Subhūti, taught by the tathāgata. And that which the tathāgata teaches as the ‘highest perfection’, that is taught also by immeasurable Buddhas and Bhagavāns. Therefore it is called the ‘highest perfection’.

Furthermore, Subhūti, the tathāgata’s perfection of patience (kṣāṃtipāramitā) — that is itself a non-perfection (apāramitā). Why is that? When, Subhūti, the King of Kaliṅga cut my limbs and joints, at that time I had no perception of self, or perception of a being, or perception of a life-force, or perception of a person. I had neither any perception nor non-perception. Why is that? If, Subhūti, at that time I had had a perception of self, a perception of ill-will (vyāpādasaṃjñā) would also have been present in me at that time. I recall, Subhūti, in a past time, five hundred births ago, when I was the sage ‘Preacher of Patience’ (kṣāṃtivādī), even then I had no perception of self, no perception of a being, no perception of a life-force, no perception of a person.

Therefore, then, Subhūti, a bodhisattva, a mahāsattva, having abandoned all perceptions, should produce the thought of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ (unexcelled, perfect, complete enlightenment). A thought should be produced that is not established in form. A thought should be produced that is not established in sound, smell, taste, or tangibles. A thought should be produced that is not established in dharma. A thought should be produced that is not established in non-dharma. A thought should be produced that is not established anywhere. Why is that? Because that which is established is itself the unestablished. Therefore the tathāgata teaches: ‘A gift should be given unestablished in form.’

Furthermore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should make this renunciation of a gift (dānaparityāgaḥ) in this way, for the sake of all beings. And the very ‘perception of a being’ — that is a non-perception. Those very ‘all beings’ taught by the tathāgata — they are non-beings. The tathāgata is a speaker of the real (bhūtavādī), Subhūti, a speaker of the true (satyavādī), a speaker of the thusness (tathāvādī), the tathāgata is not a speaker of the false (vitathāvādī).

Furthermore, Subhūti, that dharma which was fully awakened to or taught by the tathāgata — in it there is neither truth nor falsehood. Suppose, Subhūti, there were a man who has entered the darkness. Thus is a bodhisattva to be seen who has become dependent on objects (vastupatito), who renounces a gift having become dependent on objects. Suppose, Subhūti, there were a man with sight, when the night has dawned and the sun has risen, who would see various forms. Thus is a bodhisattva to be seen who renounces a gift without becoming dependent on objects.

Furthermore, Subhūti, those sons or daughters of good family who will take up this dharmaparyāya, uphold it, recite it, master it — they are known, Subhūti, by the tathāgata; they are seen, Subhūti, by the tathāgata; they are understood (buddhās) by the tathāgata. All those beings will produce an immeasurable store of merit (puṇyaskandhaṃ).

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

atha khalv āyuṣmān subhūtiḥ dharmapravegenāśrūṇi prāmuṃcat | pravartayaṃ so ’śrūṇi parimārjya bhagavaṃtam etad avocat | āścaryaṃ bhagavan | paramāścaryaṃ sugata | yāvad ayaṃ dharmaparyāyaḥ tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | yato me bhagavan | jñānam utpannaṃ na mayā jātv eva dharmaparyāyaḥ śrutapūrvaḥ | parameṇa te bhagavan | āścaryeṇa samanvāgatā bhaviṣyaṃti ya iha sūtre bhāṣyamāṇe bhūtasaṃjñām utpādayiṣyaṃti | yā caiṣā bhagavan | bhūtasaṃjñā saivāsaṃjñā tasmāt tathāgato bhāṣate bhūtasaṃjñā bhūtasaṃjñeti |

na mama bhagavann āścaryaṃ yad ahaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃ bhāṣyamāṇam avakalpayāmy adhimucyāmi | ye te bhagavann imaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃm udgṛhīṣyaṃti paryavāpsyaṃti dhārayiṣyaṃti | te paramāścaryasamanvāgatā bhaviṣyaṃti | ||

api tu khalu punaḥ bhagavan na teṣām ātmasaṃjñā pravartsyate | na satvasaṃjñā na jīvasaṃjñā | na pudgalasaṃjñā pravartsyate | tat kasya hetoḥ yāsāv ātmasaṃjñā saivāsaṃjñā | yā satvasaṃjñā jīvasaṃjñā pudgalasaṃjñā saivāsaṃjñā | tat kasya hetoḥ | sarvasaṃjñāpagatā hi buddhā bhagavaṃtaḥ ||

evam ukte bhagavān āyuṣmaṃtaṃ subhūtim etad avocat | evam etat subhūte evam etat subhūte paramāścaryasamanvāgatās te satvā bhaviṣyaṃti | ya iha sūtre bhāṣyaṃmāṇe śrutvā nottrasiṣyaṃti | na saṃtrasiṣyaṃti | na saṃtrāsam āpatsyaṃte | tat kasya hetoḥ | paramapāramiteyaṃ subhūte tathāgatena bhāṣitā | yāṃ ca tathāgataḥ paramapāramitāṃ bhāṣate tām aparimāṃṇā buddhā bhagavaṃto bhāṣaṃte | tenocyate paramapāramiteti |

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte yā tathāgatasya kṣāṃtipāramitā saivāpāramitā | tat kasya hetoḥ | yadā me subhūte kaliṃgarājā aṃgapratyaṃgāny acchetsīn nāsīn me tasmin samaye ātmasaṃjñā vā satvasaṃjñā vā jīvasaṃjñā vā pudgalasaṃjñā vā na me kācit saṃjñā nāsaṃjñā babhūva | tat kasya hetoḥ | sacet subhūte mama tasmin samaye ātmasaṃjñābhaviṣyat | vyāpādasaṃjñāpi me ’bhaviṣyat tasmin samaye | abhijānāmy ahaṃ subhūte atīte ’dhvani paṃca jātiśatāni yad ahaṃ kṣāṃtivādī riṣir abhū tadāpi me nātmasaṃjñā babhūva | na satvasaṃjñā na jīvasaṃjñā na pudgalasaṃjñā | tasmāt tarhi subhūte bodhisatvena mahāsatvena sarvasaṃjñā vivarjayitvānuttarāyāṃ samyaksaṃbodhau cittam utpādayitavyam | na rūpapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | na śabdagandharasaspraṣṭavyapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | na dharmapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayivtavyam | nādharmapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | na kvacitpratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | tat kasmād dhetoḥ | yat pratiṣṭhitaṃ tad evāpratiṣṭhitaṃ | tasmād eva tathāgato bhāṣate rūpāpratiṣṭhitena dānaṃ dātavyam |

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte bodhisatvenaivaṃ dānaparityāgaḥ parityajyaḥ sarvasatvānām arthāya | yaiva ca satvasaṃjñā sa evāsaṃjñā | ya eva te sarvasatvāḥ tathāgatena bhāṣitāḥ ta evāsatvāḥ | bhūtavādī subhūte tathāgataḥ satyavādī tathāvādī tathāgato na vitathāvādī tathāgato |

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte yaḥ tathāgatena dharmo ’bhisaṃbuddho deśito vā na tatra satyaṃ na mṛṣā | tad yathāpi nāma subhūte puruṣo ’ndhakārapraviṣṭaḥ | evaṃ vastupatito bodhisatvo draṣṭavyo yo vastupatitaṃ dānaṃ parityajati | tad yathāpi nāma subhūte cakṣuṣmān puruṣo vibhātāyāṃ rātryāṃ sūrye ’bhyudgate nānāvidhāni rūpāṇi paśyet | evaṃ bodhisatvo draṣṭavyo yo vastvapatitaṃ dānaṃ parityajati |

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte ye kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā imaṃ dharmaparyāyam udgrahīṣyaṃti | dhārayiṣyaṃti | vācayiṣyaṃti | paryavāpsyaṃti | jñātās te subhūte tathāgatena dṛṣṭās te subhūte tathāgatena buddhās te tathāgatena | sarve te satvāḥ aprameyaṃ puṇyaskandhaṃ prasaviṣyaṃti |

§15

Translation

And yet, Subhūti, if a woman or man were to renounce physical self (ātmabhāvān) equal to the grains of sand in the Ganges river in the forenoon, and in the middle of the day, and in the evening were to renounce physical selves equal to the grains of sand in the Ganges river, and in this way were to renounce physical selves for hundreds of thousands of millions of billions (koṭīnayutaśatasahasrāṇy) of eons (kalpa); and if another, having heard this dharmaparyāya, should not reject it — this one would produce far more merit on that account, immeasurable, incalculable. How much more so one who, having written it, would take it up, uphold it, recite it, master it, and explain it to others in detail!

Furthermore, Subhūti, this dharmaparyāya is inconceivable (aciṃtyo), incomparable (atulyo). And this dharmaparyāya was taught by the tathāgata for the sake of beings who have set out in the highest vehicle (agrayāna), for the sake of beings who have set out in the best vehicle (śreṣṭhayāna). Those who will take up this dharmaparyāya, uphold it, recite it, master it — they are known, Subhūti, by the tathāgata; they are seen, Subhūti, by the tathāgata. All those beings will be endowed with an immeasurable store of merit, endowed with an inconceivable, incomparable, unmeasurable, limitless store of merit. Why is that? Because, Subhūti, this dharma cannot be heard by those of inferior resolve (hīnādhimuktikaiḥ). It cannot be heard, taken up, upheld, recited, or mastered by those with a view of self (ātmadṛṣṭikaiḥ), or a view of a being, or a view of a life-force, or a view of a person. This is not possible.

Furthermore, Subhūti, whatever spot of earth where this sūtra will be taught, that spot of earth will become worthy of worship (pūjanīyaḥ). It will become worthy of reverence and circumambulation by the world with its gods, humans, and asuras. That spot of earth will become a caitya (shrine).

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte strī vā puruṣo vā pūrvāhṇakālasamaye gaṃgānadīvālukopamān ātmabhāvān parityajet | madhyāhṇakālasamaye sāyāhṇakālasamaye gaṃgānadīvālukopamān ātmabhāvān parityajet | anena paryāyeṇa kalpakoṭīnayutaśatasahasrāṇy ātmabhāvān parityajet | yaś cemaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃ śrutvā | na pratikṣiped ayam eva tatonidānaṃ bahutaraṃ puṇyaskandhaṃ prasunuyāt | aprameyam asaṃkhyeyam | kaḥ punar vādaḥ yo likhitvodgṛhṇīyāt | dhārayet | vācayet | paryavāpnuyāt | parebhyaś ca vistareṇa saṃprakāśayet |

api tu subhūte aciṃtyo ’tulyo ’yaṃ dharmaparyāyaḥ | ayaṃ ca dharmaparyāyaḥ tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ agrayānasaṃprasthitānāṃ satvānām arthāya | śreṣṭhayānasaṃprasthitānāṃ satvānām arthāya | ye imaṃ dharmaparyāyam udgrahīṣyaṃti | dhārayiṣyaṃti | vācayiṣyaṃti | paryavāpsyaṃti | jñātās te subhūte tathāgatena dṛṣṭās te subhūte tathāgatena | sarve te satvāḥ aprameyeṇa puṇyaskandhena samanvāgatā bhaviṣyaṃti | aciṃtyenātulyenāmāpyenāparimāṇena puṇyaskandhena samanvāgatā bhaviṣyaṃti | tat kasya hetoḥ | na hi śakyaṃ subhūte ayaṃ dharmo hīnādhimuktikaiḥ śrotum | nātmadṛṣṭikaiḥ na satvadṛṣṭikaiḥ na jīvadṛṣṭikaiḥ na pudgaladṛṣṭikaiḥ śakyaṃ śrotum udgrahītuṃ vā dhārayituṃ vā vācayituṃ vā paryavāptuṃ vā nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate |

api tu subhūte yatra pṛthivīpradeśe idaṃ sūtraṃ prakāśayiṣyati | pūjanīyaḥ sa pṛthivīpradeśo bhaviṣyati | sadevamānuṣāsurasya lokasya vandanīyaḥ pradakṣiṇīkaraṇīyaś ca sa pṛthivīpradeśo bhaviṣyati | caitya sa pṛthivīpradeśo bhaviṣyati |

§16

Translation

Those sons or daughters of good family, Subhūti, who will take up, uphold, and master these sūtra passages, they will be despised, they will be greatly despised.

Whatever deeds (karmāṇi) leading to an evil destiny (apāyasaṃvartanīyāni) were done by those beings in former lives, through being despised in this present life (dṛṣṭa eva dharme), their evil deeds from former lives will be exhausted. And they will attain Buddha-enlightenment (buddhabodhiṃ).

I recall, Subhūti, in a past time, incalculable (asaṃkhyeye), most incalculable eons (kalpe) ago, long before Dīpaṃkara, the tathāgata, the arhat, the samyaksaṃbuddha, there were eighty-four hundreds of thousands of millions of billions (caturaśītibuddhakoṭīnayutaśatasahasrāṇy) of Buddhas, who were attended upon by me, and having been attended upon, were not displeased. And, Subhūti, that [merit] from my having attended upon those Buddhas, the Bhagavāns, and not having displeased them, and that [merit] of those who, in the final time, in the last five-hundred-year period, will take up, uphold, recite, and master this sūtra… compared to this latter store of merit (puṇyaskandhasya), Subhūti, that former store of merit does not approach even a hundredth part, nor a thousandth, nor a hundred-thousandth, nor a hundred-thousand-millionth. It does not bear number, nor fraction, nor calculation, nor comparison, nor analogy.

If, Subhūti, I were to declare the store of merit of those sons or daughters of good family — to the extent that those sons or daughters of good family receive a store of merit at that time — beings would go to madness, or their minds would become distracted.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

ye te subhūte kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā imān evaṃrūpāṃ sūtrāṃtān udgrahīṣyaṃti dhārayiṣyaṃti paryavāpsyaṃti | te paribhūtā bhaviṣyaṃti suparibhūtāś ca bhaviṣyaṃti | || yāni teṣāṃ satvānāṃ paurvajanmikāni karmāṇi kṛtāny apāyasaṃvartanīyāni dṛṣṭa eva dharme paribhūtatayā pūrvajanmikāny aśubhāni karmāṇi kṣapayiṣyaṃti | buddhabodhiṃ ca prāpsyaṃti |

abhijānāmy ahaṃ subhūte atīte ’dhvani asaṃkhyeye kalpe asaṃkhyeyatare dīpaṃkarasya tathāgatasyārhataḥ samyaksaṃbuddhasya pareṇa parataraṃ caturaśītibuddhakoṭīnayutaśatasahasrāṇy abhūvan ye mayā ārādhitā ārādhayetvā na virādhitā | yac ca mayā subhūte buddhā bhagavaṃtaḥ ārāgitā ārāgayetvā na virāgitā yac ca carime kāle paścimikāyaṃ paṃcāśatyāṃ vartamānāyām imaṃ sūtrāṃtam udgrahīṣyaṃti dhārayiṣyaṃti vācayiṣyaṃti paryavāpsyaṃti | asya subhūte puṇyaskandhasyāṃtikād eṣa pūrvakaḥ puṇyaskandhaḥ śatatamīm api kalāṃ nopaiti sāhasṛtamām api | śatasāhasṛtamām api | koṭīśatasāhasṛtamām api | saṃkhyām api kalām api gaṇanām api upamām api upaniśām api na kṣamate |

sacet subhūte teṣāṃ kulaputrāṇāṃ kuladuhit•ṇāṃ vā puṇyaskandhaṃ bhāṣet | yāvaṃtaḥ te kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā tasmin samaye puṇyaskandhaṃ pratigṛhṇaṃti | unmādaṃ te satvāḥ prāpnuyuḥ cittavikṣepaṃ vā gaccheyuḥ |

Gilgit Vajracchedikā

Caution

The Gilgit manuscript is a fragment missing the first 4 sectionas (as well as §§6), and appears to be poorly edited as the text rambles on with some repeated concepts. I suspect the text includes some sections that are later additions to the sutra.

§§5

Translation

… Bhagavān said:

As many, Subhūti, as are the dust particles in the three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu (world-system), would that be much?

He said:

Much, Bhagavān, is that dust. It is spoken of by the Tathāgata as non-dust, therefore it is called ‘dust particle’. And that which is the lokadhātu (world-system), that is a non-system spoken of by the Tathāgata, therefore it is called ‘lokadhātu’.

Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti, is the Tathāgata to be seen by the thirty-two mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇas (marks of a great man)?

He said:

No, Bhagavān. For what reason? Those thirty-two mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇas that were spoken of by the Tathāgata are non-marks, therefore they are called ‘the thirty-two mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇas’.

Bhagavān said:

And furthermore, Subhūti, if a woman or a man were to renounce physical selves equal to the sands of the river Ganges, and if someone, having learned from this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) at least a four-lined verse, should teach it to others, this one on that account would generate much puṇya (merit), immeasurable, innumerable.

Then, indeed, the āyuṣmān Subhūti, from the force of the dharma (teaching), shed tears. Wiping away his tears, he said this to the Bhagavān:

Wonderful, Bhagavān, most wonderful, Sugata, is this dharmaparyāya spoken by the Tathāgata! From it, Bhagavān, knowledge has arisen in me. Never before has this dharmaparyāya been heard by me. Endowed with the highest wonder will they be, Bhagavān, who, when this sūtra is being spoken, produce a bhūtasaṃjñā (perception of reality). And this, Bhagavān, which is a bhūtasaṃjñā, that itself is not a bhūtasaṃjñā. Therefore the Tathāgata speaks of: ‘bhūtasaṃjñā, bhūtasaṃjñā’.

It is no wonder to me, Bhagavān, that I understand and am convinced of this dharmaparyāya as it is being spoken. Those beings, Bhagavān, who will take up this dharmaparyāya, who will master it, they will be endowed with the highest wonder. But furthermore, Bhagavān, no ātmasaṃjñā (perception of a self) will operate in them, no satvasaṃjñā (perception of a being), no jīvasaṃjñā (perception of a life-principle), no pudgalasaṃjñā (perception of a person). For what reason? The Buddhas (awakened ones), the Bhagavāns, are devoid of all perceptions.

Bhagavān said:

So it is, Subhūti. Endowed with the highest wonder will they be who, upon hearing this dharmaparyāya, will not be terrified, will not be frightened, will not fall into a state of terror. For what reason? This, Subhūti, is the paramapāramitā (supreme perfection) spoken of by the Tathāgata. And that paramapāramitā which the Tathāgata speaks of, immeasurable Buddhas (awakened ones), Bhagavāns, speak of it. Therefore it is called ‘paramapāramitā’.

But furthermore, Subhūti, that which is the Tathāgata’s kṣāntipāramitā (perfection of patience), that itself is a no-perfection. For what reason? When, Subhūti, the king of Kali cut the flesh from my limbs, at that time I had no ātmasaṃjñā or satvasaṃjñā or jīvasaṃjñā or pudgalasaṃjñā. Had I at that time a perception of ill-will… I recall, Subhūti, in a past time, five hundred births ago, I was the sage who taught patience. Even then I had no ātmasaṃjñā, no satvasaṃjñā, no jīvasaṃjñā, no pudgalasaṃjñā. Therefore, then, Subhūti, a bodhisattva (enlightenment-being), a mahāsattva (great being), having abandoned all perceptions …

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

… ḥtaḥ bhagavān āha | yāvat subhūte trisāhasramahāsāhasre lokadhātau pṛthivīrajaḥ kaccit tad bahu | āha | bahu bhagavan tat pṛthivīrajaḥ arajas tathāgatena bhāṣitas tenocyate pṛthivīraja iti | yo ‘py asau lokadhātur adhātuḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitas tenocyate lokadhātur iti //

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte dvātṛṃśatā mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇais tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ āha | no bhagavaṃs tat kasya heto tāni tāni dvātriṃśan mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇāni tathāgatena bhāṣitāny alakṣaṇāni tenocyante dvātriṃśan mahāpuruṣalakṣaṇānīti | bhagavān āha | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte strī vā puruṣo vā gaṃgānadīvālukopamān ātmabhāvān parityajed yaś ceto dharmaparyāyād antaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya parebhyo deśayed ayam eva tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasavetāprameyam asaṃkhyeyaṃ //

atha khalv āyuṣmāṃ subhūtir dharmapravegenāsrūṇi prāmuṃcat so ‘srūṇi prāmṛjya bhagavantam etad avocat* āścaryaṃ bhagavan paramāścaryaṃ sugata | yāvad ayaṃ dharmaparyāyas tathāgatena bhāṣito yato me bhagavaṃ jñānam utpannaṃ na me jātv ayaṃ dharmaparyāyaḥ śrūtapūrvaḥ parameṇa  te bhagavann āścaryena samanvāgatā bhaviṣyanti ya iha sūtre bhāṣyamāṇe bhūtasaṃjñām utpādayiṣyanti | yā caiṣā bhagavan bhūtasaṃjñā saivā x-ṃj-x-ā x smāt tathāgato bhāṣate

bhū xxx bhūtasaṃjñeti | na me bhagavann āścaryaṃ yad aham imaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃ bhāṣyamāṇam avakalpayāmy adhimucya | ye te bhagavan satvā imaṃ dharmaparyāyam udgrahīṣyanti | yāvat paryavāpsyanti | te paramāścaryasamanvāgatā bhaviṣyanti | api tu khalu punar bhagavan na teṣām ātmasaṃjñā pravartsyate | na satvasaṃjñā na jīvasaṃjñā na pudgalasaṃjñā | tat kasya hetoḥ sarvasaṃjñāpagatāhi buddhā bhagavantaḥ bhagavān āha | evam etat subhūte paramāścaryasamanvāgatās te bhaviṣyanti ya imaṃ dharmaparyāyaṃ śrutvā nottrasiṣyanti | na saṃtrasiṣyanti | na saṃtrāsam āpatsyante | tat kasya hetoḥ paramapāramiteyaṃ subhūte tathāgatena bhāṣitā| yāṃ ca tathāgataḥ paramapāramitāṃ bhāṣate | tām aparimāṇā buddhā bhagavanto bhāṣante | tenocyate paramapāramiteti //

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte ya tathāgatasya kṣāntipāramitā saivāpāramitā | tat kasya hetoḥ yadā subhūte kalirājāṅgapratyaṃgamāṃsāny acchaitsīt nāsīn me tasmin samaye ātmasaṃjñā vā satvasaṃjñā vā jīvasaṃjñā vā pudgalasaṃjñā vā | vyāpādasaṃjñā vāpi me tasmin samaye ‘bhaviṣyad abhijānāmy ahaṃ subhūte atīte ‘dhvani paṃca jātiśatāni yo ‘haṃ kṣāntivādī ṛṣir abhūvaṃs tatrāpi me nātmasaṃjñābhūn na satvasaṃjñā na jīvasaṃjñā na pudgalasaṃjñā | tasmāt tarhi subhūte bodhisatvena mahāsatvena sarvasaṃjñā varjayitvā …

§§6

[missing]

§§7

Translation

… All those beings will bear my aṃsa (share) of bodhi (awakening). For what reason? It is not possible, Subhūti, for this dharmaparyāya (method of teaching) to be heard by beings of hīnādhimuktika (inferior resolve), nor is it possible for it to be heard, taken up, or mastered by those with an ātmadṛṣṭika (view of a self), or a satva-jīva-pudgala-dṛṣṭika (view of a being, life-principle, or person). This state of affairs does not exist. But furthermore, Subhūti, whatever spot of earth this sūtra shall be proclaimed upon, that spot of earth will be worthy of worship. It will be worthy of veneration and circumambulation by the world with its gods, humans, and asuras. That spot of earth will become like a caitya (shrine). Those kulaputras (sons of good family) or kuladuhitṛs (daughters of good family), Subhūti, who will take up sūtra passages of this kind, and master them, they will be despised, utterly despised. And whatever evil karmas (actions) of those beings from previous births were apāyasaṃvartanīyāni (leading to a lower rebirth), those will be extinguished in this very life through that despisal, and they will attain buddhabodhi (the awakening of a Buddha). I recall, Subhūti, in a time past, asaṃkhyeya (incalculable) kalpas (aeons) ago, more incalculable still, before Dīpaṃkara the Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksaṃbuddha, there were eighty-four hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of Buddhas, whom I honored, and having honored, did not dishonor. And that I, Subhūti, honored those Buddhas, Bhagavāns, and did not dishonor them, and that in the last time, when the final pañcāśat (period of five hundred years) is occurring, they will take up these sūtra passages, and master them — of this latter puṇyaskandha (mass of merit), Subhūti, that former puṇyaskandha does not approach even the one-hundredth part, nor the one-thousandth part, nor the one-hundred-thousandth part. It does not bear number, nor fraction, nor counting, nor comparison, nor analogy. Should I, Subhūti, declare the puṇyaskandha of those kulaputras and kuladuhitṛs, to what extent those beings, kulaputras and kuladuhitṛs, will at that time acquire a puṇyaskandha, beings would attain madness or go into mental distraction. But furthermore, Subhūti, this dharmaparyāya is inconceivable; its result is likewise inconceivable.

He said:

How, Bhagavān, should one who has set out in the bodhisatvayāna (bodhisatvayāna-way) stand, how should one train, how should one control the mind?

Bhagavān said:

Here, Subhūti, one who has set out in the bodhisatvayāna should produce the thought thus: “All beings are to be led by me to final nirvāṇa (extinguishment) in the anupadhiśeṣa nirvāṇadhātu (realm of extinguishment without remaining residue).” And having thus led beings to final nirvāṇa, not a single being has been led to final nirvāṇa.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

… ḥrimāṇena | sarve te satvā mamāṃsena bodhiṃ dhārayiṣyanti | tat kasya hetoḥ na hi śakyaṃ subhūte ayaṃ dharmaparyāyo hīnādhimuktikaiḥ satvaiḥ śrotuṃ| nātmadṛṣṭikair na satvajīvapudgaladṛṣṭikaiḥ śakyaṃ śrotuṃ udgrahītuṃ vā | yāvat paryavāptuṃ vā nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate | api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte yatra pṛthivīpradeśe idaṃ sūtraṃ prakāśayiṣyati | pūjanīyaḥ sa pṛthivīpradeśo bhaviṣyati | sadevamānuṣāsurasya lokasya vandanīyaḥ pradakṣiṇīkaraṇīyaś caityabhūta sa pṛthivīpradeśo bhaviṣyati | ye te subhūte kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā | imān evaṃrūpān sūtrāntān udgrahīṣyanti yāvat paryavāpsyanti | te paribhūtā bhaviṣyanti suparibhūtāḥ yāni ca teṣāṃ satvānāṃ pūrvajanmikāny aśubhāni karmāṇy apāyasaṃvartanīyāni tāni dṛṣṭa eva dharme paribhūtatayā kṣapayiṣyanti buddabodhiṃ cānuprāpsyanti | abhijānāmy ahaṃ subhūte atīte ‘dhvany asaṃkhyeyaiḥ kalpair asaṃkhyeyatarair dīpaṃkarasya tathāgatasyārhataḥ samyaksaṃbuddhasya pareṇa caturaśītir buddhakoṭīniyutaśatasahasrāṇy abhūvan yāni mayā ārāgitāni ārāgya ca na virāgitāni | yac ca mayā subhūte te buddhā bhagavanta ārāgya na virāgitā

yac ca carime kāle paścimāyāṃ paṃcāśatyāṃ vartamānāyām imāṃ sūtrāntān udgrahīṣyanti | yāvat paryavāpsyanti | asya subhūte puṇyaskandhasyāsau pūrvakaḥ puṇyaskandhaḥ śatatamīm api kalān nopaiti | sahasratamīm api | śatasahasratamīm api | saṃkhyām api kalām api gaṇanām apy upamām apy upaniśām api na kṣamate | sacet subhūte teṣāṃ kulaputrāṇāṃ kuladuhitrīṇāṃ ca puṇyaskandhaṃ bhāṣeyaṃ yāvantas te satvā kulaputrāḥ kuladuhitaraś ca tasmin samaye puṇyaskandhaṃ parigrahīṣyanti | unmādaṃ satvā anuprāpnuyuś cittavikṣepaṃ vā gaccheyuḥ api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte acintyo ‘yaṃ dharmaparyāyaḥ asyācintya eva vipākaḥ //

āha | kathaṃ bhagavan bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitena sthātavyaṃ kathaṃ pratipattavyaṃ kathaṃ cittaṃ pragṛhītavyaṃ | bhagavān āha | iha subhūte bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitenaivaṃ cittam utpādayitavyaṃ sarvasatvā mayā anupadhiśeṣe nirvāṇadhātau parinirvāpayitavyāḥ evaṃ ca satvān parinirvāpya na kaścit satvaḥ parinirvāpito bhavati |

§§8

Translation

For what reason? If, Subhūti, a satvasaṃjñā (perception of a being), jīvasaṃjñā (perception of a life-principle), or pudgalasaṃjñā (perception of a person) should operate in a bodhisattva (enlightenment-being), he should not be called a ‘bodhisattva’. For what reason? There is not, Subhūti, any dharma (phenomenon) which is named ‘one who has set out in the bodhisatvayāna (bodhisattva-way)’. What do you think, Subhūti, is there any dharma by which the Tathāgata fully awakened to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unexcelled perfect and complete awakening) in the presence of the Dīpaṃkara Tathāgata?

He said:

There is no dharma, Bhagavān, by which the Tathāgata fully awakened to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi in the presence of the Dīpaṃkara Tathāgata.

Bhagavān said:

Therefore I was prophesied by the Dīpaṃkara Tathāgata: “You, young man, in a future time, will be a Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksaṃbuddha, named Śākyamuni.” For what reason? ‘Tathāgata’, Subhūti, is an epithet for tathatā (suchness). Whoever, Subhūti, should say thus: “The Tathāgata has fully awakened to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi” — there is no dharma, Subhūti, that has been fully awakened to as anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi by the Tathāgata. The dharma, Subhūti, that was fully awakened to by the Tathāgata, therein is neither truth nor falsehood. Therefore the Tathāgata says: “All dharmas are buddhadharmas (phenomena of a Buddha).” ‘All dharmas’, Subhūti, all of them are non-dharmas; therefore they are called ‘all dharmas’.

Just as, for example, Subhūti, there might be a man with a large body, a great body.

Subhūti said:

That which was spoken of by the Tathāgata as a man with a large body, a great body — a non-body, Bhagavān, was spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore he is called ‘a man with a large body, a great body’.

Bhagavān said:

So it is, Subhūti. A bodhisattva who would say thus: “I shall lead beings to final nirvāṇa” should not be called a ‘bodhisattva’. For what reason? Is there, Subhūti, any dharma that is called a ‘bodhisattva’

He said:

There is not, Bhagavān.

Bhagavān said:

Therefore the Tathāgata says: “All dharmas are without being, without life-principle, without person.” A bodhisattva, Subhūti, who would say thus: “I shall accomplish the kṣetravyūhas (literally: arrangements of a field, but presumably an epithet for “establishing a “buddha-field”),” he too should be spoken of in the same way. For what reason? ‘Kṣetravyūhas, kṣetravyūhas, Subhūti, are non-arrangements spoken of by the Tathāgata; therefore they are called ‘kṣetravyūhas’. That bodhisattva, Subhūti, who is convinced “dharmas are selfless, dharmas are selfless,” is declared by the Tathāgata, the Arhat, the Samyaksaṃbuddha as ‘bodhisattva, bodhisattva’. What do you think, Subhūti, does the Tathāgata possess the māṃsacakṣuḥ (physical eye)?

He said:

So it is, Bhagavān, the Tathāgata possesses the māṃsacakṣuḥ (physical eye).

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tat kasya hetoḥ sacet subhūte bodhisatvasya satvasaṃjñā pravarteta | jīvasaṃjñā pudgalasaṃjñā vā na sa bodhisatva iti vaktavyaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ nāsti subhūte sa dharmo yo bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthito nāma | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte asti sa kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatena dīpaṃkarasya tathāgatasyāntikād anuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbuddhaḥ āha | nāsti sa bhagavan kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatena dīpaṃkarasya tathāgatasyāntikād anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbuddhaḥ āha | tasmād ahaṃ dīpaṃkareṇa tathāgatena vyākṛto bhaviṣyasi tvaṃ māṇavānāgate ‘dhvani śākyamunir nāma tathāgato ‘rhan samyaksaṃbuddhas tat kasya hetos tathāgata iti subhūte tathatāyā etad adhivacanaṃ yaḥ kaścit subhūte evaṃ vadet tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddheti | nāsti subhūte sa kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhaḥ yaḥ subhūte tathāgatena dharmo ‘bhisaṃbuddhas tatra na satyaṃ na mṛṣāḥ tasmāt tathāgato bhāṣate | sarvadharmā buddhadharmā iti | sarvadharmā iti subhūte sarve te adharmās tenocyante sarvadharmā iti //

tadyathāpi nāma subhūte puruṣo bhaved upetakāyo mahākāyaḥ subhūtir āha | yo

‘sau tathāgatena puruṣo bhāṣita upetakāyo mahākāyaḥ akāyaḥ sa bhagavaṃs tathāgatena bhāṣitas tenocyate upetakāyo mahākāyaḥ bhagavān āha | evam etat subhūte yo bodhisatva evaṃ vaded ahaṃ satvān parinirvāpayiṣyāmīti | na sa bodhisatva iti vaktavyaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ asti subhūte sa kaścid dharmo yo bodhisatvo nāma | āha | no hīdaṃ bhagavan bhagavān āha | tasmāt tathāgato bhāṣate niḥsatvāḥ sarvadharmāḥ nirjīvā niṣpudgalāḥ yaḥ subhūte bodhisatva evaṃ vaded ahaṃ kṣetravyūhān niṣpādayiṣyāmīti | so ‘pi tathaiva vaktavyaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ kṣetravyūhāḥ kṣetravyūhā iti subhūte avyūhās te tathāgatena bhāṣitās tenocyante kṣetravyūhā iti | yaḥ subhūte bodhisatvo nirātmāno dharmā nirātmāno dharmā ity adhimucyate sa tathāgatenārhatā samyaksaṃbuddhena bodhisatvo bodhisatva ity ākhyātas tat kiṃ manyase subhūte saṃvidyate tathāgatasya māṃsacakṣuḥ āha | evam etad bhagavan saṃvidyate tathāgatasya māṃsacakṣuḥ //

§§9

Translation

Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti, does the Tathāgata possess the divyaṃ cakṣuḥ (divine eye), the prajñācakṣuḥ (wisdom eye), the dharmacakṣuḥ (Dharma eye), the buddhacakṣuḥ (Buddha eye)?

He said:

So it is, Bhagavān, the Tathāgata possesses the divyaṃ cakṣuḥ, the prajñācakṣuḥ, the dharmacakṣuḥ, the buddhacakṣuḥ.

Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti, if there were as many Ganges rivers as there are grains of sand in the river Ganges, and as many lokadhātus (world-systems) as the grains of sand in them, would those lokadhātus (world-systems) be many?

Bhagavān said:

As many beings as there are, Subhūti, in those lokadhātus (world-systems), I would know their various streams of thought. For what reason? ‘Cittadhārā (stream of thought)’, ‘cittadhārā’, Subhūti, are non-streams spoken of by the Tathāgata; therefore they are called ‘cittadhārā’. For what reason? Past thought, Subhūti, is not apprehended. Future thought is not apprehended. Present thought is not apprehended. What do you think, Subhūti, if a kulaputra (son of good family) or kuladuhitṛ (daughter of good family), having filled this three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu with the seven precious things, were to give a gift, would he or she on that account generate much puṇya (merit)?

He said:

Much, Bhagavān, much, Sugata.

Bhagavān said:

So it is, Subhūti, so it is. That kulaputra or kuladuhitṛ would on that account generate much puṇya. If, Subhūti, a puṇyaskandha (mass of merit) existed, the Tathāgata would not have said, ‘puṇyaskandha, puṇyaskandha’. What do you think, Subhūti, is the Tathāgata to be seen by the perfection of the rūpakāya (form-body)?

He said:

No, Bhagavān, the Tathāgata is not to be seen by the perfection of the rūpakāya. For what reason? ‘Perfection of the rūpakāya’, ‘perfection of the rūpakāya’, this is a no-perfection spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore it is called ‘perfection of the rūpakāya’.

Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti, is the Tathāgata to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks)?

He said:

No, Bhagavān, the Tathāgata is not to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks). For what reason? That which is the lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks) spoken of by the Tathāgata, this is a no-perfection of marks spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore it is called ‘lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks)’.

Bhagavān said:

What do you think, Subhūti, does it occur to the Tathāgata thus: “A dharma (teaching) has not been taught by me”? Whoever, Subhūti, should say thus: “A dharma has been taught by the Tathāgata,” he would be slandering me, Subhūti, with what is grasped as untrue. For what reason? ‘Discourse on the Dharma’, ‘discourse on the Dharma’, Subhūti, there is no dharma (phenomenon) that is found which is named ‘discourse on the Dharma’.

He said:

Are there, Bhagavān, any beings who will exist in a future time, who, upon hearing dharmas of this kind being spoken, will have faith?

Bhagavān said:

They, Subhūti, are not beings, nor non-beings. For what reason? ‘All beings’, Subhūti, are non-beings spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore they are called ‘all beings’.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte saṃvidyate tathāgatasya divyaṃ cakṣuḥ prajñācakṣur dharmacakṣur buddhacakṣuḥ āhaivam etad bhagavan saṃvidyate tathāgatasya divyaṃ cakṣuḥ prajñācakṣur dharmacakṣur buddhacakṣuḥ //

bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte yāvantyo gaṃgānadyāṃ vālukās tāvantya gaṃgānadyo bhaveyus tāsu yā vālukās tāvanta eva lokadhātavo bhaveyuḥ kaccid bahavas te lokadhātavo bhaveyuḥ bhagavān āha | yāvantaḥ subhūte teṣu lokadhātuṣu satvās teṣām ahaṃ nānābhāvāṃ cittadhārāṃ jānīyās tat kasya hetoś cittadhārā cittadhārā iti subhūte adhārās tās tathāgatena bhāṣitās tenocyante cittadhārā iti | tat kasya hetor atītaṃ subhūte cittaṃ nopalabhyate | anāgataṃ cittaṃ nopalabhyate | pratyutpannaṃ nopalabhyate | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte ya imaṃ trisāhasramahāsāhasraṃ lokadhātuṃ saptaratnaparipūrṇaṃ kṛtvā dānaṃ dadyād api nu sa kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasaveta | āha | bahu bhagavan bahu sugata | bhagavān āha | evam etat subhūte evam etad bahu sa kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā tatonidānaṃ bahu puṇyaṃ prasaveta | sacet subhūte puṇyaskandho ‘bhaviṣyan na tathāgato ‘bhāṣiṣyat puṇyaskandhaḥ puṇyaskandha iti | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte rūpakāyapariniṣpattyā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ

āha | no bhagavan na rūpakāyapariniṣpattyā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ rūpakāyapariniṣpattī rūpakāyapariniṣpattir ity apariniṣpattir eṣā tathāgatena bhāṣitā tenocyate rūpakāyapariniṣpattir iti | bhagavan āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ āha | no bhagavan na lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ yaiṣā lakṣaṇasaṃpat tathāgatena bhāṣitā alakṣaṇasaṃpad eṣā tathāgatena bhāṣitā tenocyate lakṣaṇasaṃpad iti | bhagavān āha | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nu tathāgatasyaivaṃ bhavati na mayā dharmo deśita iti | yaḥ subhūte evaṃ vadet tathāgatena dharmo deśita iti | abhyācakṣīta māṃsa subhūte asatād udgṛhītena | tat kasya hetor dharmadeśanā dharmadeśaneti subhūte nāsti sa kaścid dharmo yo dharmadeśanā nāmopalabhyate | āhāsti bhagavan kecit satvā bhaviṣyanty anāgate ‘dhvani ya imān evaṃrūpān dharmān bhāṣyamāṇāṃ cchrutvābhiśraddadhāsyanti | bhagavān āha | na te subhūte satvā nāsatvās tat kasya hetoḥ sarvasatvā iti subhūte asatvās te tathāgatena bhāṣitās tenocyante sarvasatvā iti |

§§10

Translation

What do you think, Subhūti, is there any dharma (phenomenon) that was fully awakened to by the Tathāgata as anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unexcelled perfect and complete awakening)?

He said:

There is no dharma, Bhagavān, that was fully awakened to by the Tathāgata as anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.

Bhagavān said:

So it is, Subhūti, so it is. Not even a minute dharma exists or is found there. Therefore it is called ‘anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi’. But furthermore, Subhūti, that dharma is equal; there is nothing unequal in it. Therefore it is called ‘anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi’. Through being without life-principle, without being, without person, that same anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is fully awakened to through all wholesome dharmas. ‘Wholesome dharmas’, ‘wholesome dharmas’, Subhūti, they are indeed non-dharmas spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore they are called ‘wholesome dharmas’. And furthermore, Subhūti, if someone, having collected heaps of the seven precious things as numerous as the Sumerus, kings of mountains, in the three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu (world-system), were to give a gift, and if someone, having learned from this Prajñāpāramitā at least a four-lined verse, should teach it to others — of this puṇyaskandha (mass of merit), Subhūti, that former puṇyaskandha does not approach even the one-hundredth part, as far as not bearing even an analogy.

What do you think, Subhūti, does it occur to the Tathāgata thus: “Beings have been liberated by me”? Not so, indeed, Subhūti, should it be seen. For what reason? There is no being who has been liberated by the Tathāgata. If again, Subhūti, there had been any being who was liberated by the Tathāgata, that itself would be for him a grasp of a self, a grasp of a being, a grasp of a life-principle, a grasp of a person. ‘Grasp of a self’, Subhūti, is a non-grasp spoken of by the Tathāgata. And it is grasped by bālapṛthagjanas (foolish common people). ‘Bālapṛthagjanas’, Subhūti, are no-people spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore they are called ‘bālapṛthagjanas’. What do you think, Subhūti, is the Tathāgata to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks)?

He said:

so it is, Bhagavān, the Tathāgata is to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad.

Bhagavān said:

If, again, Subhūti, the Tathāgata were to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad, a wheel-turning king would also be a Tathāgata.

He said:

As I understand the meaning of the Bhagavān’s words, the Tathāgata is not to be seen by the lakṣaṇasaṃpad.

Then, indeed, the Bhagavān at that time recited these verses:

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api tv asti sa kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhaḥ āha | nāsti sa bhagavan kaścid dharmo yas tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhaḥ bhagavān āha | evam etat subhūte evam etat aṇur api tatra dharmo na saṃvidyate nopalabhyate tenocyate ‘nuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir iti | api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte samaḥ sa dharmo na tatra kiṃcid viṣamas tenocyate ‘nuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir iti | nirjīvatvena niḥsatvatvena niṣpudgalatvena samā sānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhiḥ sarvaiḥ kuśalair dharmair abhisaṃbudhyate | kuśalā dharmāḥ kuśalā dharmā iti subhūte adharmāś caiva te tathāgatena bhāṣitās tenocyante kuśalā dharmā iti | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte yāvantas trisāhasramahāsāhasre lokadhātau sumeravaḥ parvatarājās tāvato rāśīn saptānāṃ ratnānām abhisaṃhṛtya dānaṃ dadyād yaś cetaḥ prajñāpāramitāyā antaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya parebhyo deśayed asya subhūte puṇyaskandhasyāsau pūrvakaḥ puṇyaskandhaḥ śatatamīm api kalān nopaiti | yāvad upaniśām

api na kṣamate | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte api nu tathāgatasyaivaṃ bhavati | mayā satvā mocitā iti | na khalu punaḥ subhūte-r-evaṃ draṣṭavyaṃ | tat kasya hetoḥ na sa kaścit satvo yas tathāgatena mocitaḥ yadi punaḥ subhūte kaścit satvo ‘bhaviṣyad yas tathāgatena mocitaḥ sa eva tasyātmagrāho ‘bhaviṣyat satvagrāho jīvagrāhaḥ pudgalagrāhaḥ ātmagrāha iti subhūte agrāha eṣa tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ sa ca bālapṛthagjanair udgṛhītaḥ bālapṛthagjanā iti subhūte ajanā ete tathāgatena bhāṣitās tenocyaṃte bālapṛthagjanā iti | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ āhaivam etad bhagaval lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ bhagavān āha | sacet punaḥ subhūte lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyo ‘bhaviṣyad rājāpi cakravartī tathāgato ‘bhaviṣyat* āha | yathāhaṃ bhagavato bhāṣitasyārtham ājānāmi | na lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgato draṣṭavyaḥ // atha khalu bhagavāṃs tasyāṃ velāyām imā gāthā abhāṣataḥ //

§§11

Translation

Those who saw me by form,
Those who followed me by voice,
Engaged in false efforts,
Those people will not see me.
The Buddha (awakened one) is to be seen from the dharma (teaching),
The dharmakāya (dharma-body) is the Tathāgata.
And dharmatā (the nature of things) is unknowable;
It cannot be known.

What do you think, Subhūti, was anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unexcelled perfect and complete awakening) fully awakened to by the Tathāgata through the lakṣaṇasaṃpad (perfection of marks)? Not so, indeed, Subhūti, should it be seen. Not, Subhūti, was anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi fully awakened to by the Tathāgata through the lakṣaṇasaṃpad. That which, furthermore, Subhūti, might be thus: “For those who have set out in the bodhisatvayāna (bodhisatvayāna-way), the destruction or annihilation of any dharma (phenomenon) is proclaimed” — not so, indeed, Subhūti, should it be seen. For those who have set out in the bodhisatvayāna, the destruction or annihilation of any dharma is not proclaimed. And furthermore, Subhūti, if a kulaputra (son of good family) or kuladuhitṛ (daughter of good family), having filled lokadhātus (world-systems) equal to the sands of the river Ganges with the seven precious things, were to give a gift to the Tathāgatas, Arhats, Samyaksaṃbuddhas, and if a bodhisattva (enlightenment-being) should attain kṣānti (forbearance) with regard to selfless dharmas, this one would generate much more puṇya (merit) on that account. Not, indeed, Subhūti, should a puṇyaskandha (mass of merit) be grasped by a bodhisattva.

He said:

The puṇyaskandha, Bhagavān, should be taken up.

Bhagavān said:

It should be taken up, Subhūti, not grasped. Therefore it is said, ‘it should be taken up’.

But furthermore, Subhūti, whoever should say thus: “The Tathāgata goes or comes, or stands, or sits, or lies down,” he does not understand the meaning of my words. For what reason? ‘Tathāgata’, Subhūti, has not come from anywhere, nor gone to anywhere. Therefore he is called ‘Tathāgata’, Arhat, Samyaksaṃbuddha. And furthermore, Subhūti, if a kulaputra or kuladuhitṛ were to grind into ink as many lokadhātus (world-systems) as there are dust particles in the three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu — just as, for instance, a collection of atoms — what do you think, Subhūti, would that collection of atoms be large? He said, so it is, Bhagavān, that collection of atoms would be large. For what reason? If, Bhagavān, it were a collection, the Bhagavān would not have said, ‘a collection of atoms’. For what reason? That which is called ‘a collection of atoms’ has been spoken of by the Bhagavān as a no-collection. Therefore it is called ‘a collection of atoms’. And that which the Tathāgata speaks of as the ‘three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu’, that has been spoken of by the Tathāgata as a no-system. Therefore it is called the ‘three-thousand-great-thousand lokadhātu’. For what reason? If, Bhagavān, a system existed, that itself, Bhagavān, would be a piṇḍagrāha (grasp of a substance). And that very thing which has been spoken of by the Tathāgata as a piṇḍagrāha, has been spoken of by the Tathāgata as a non-grasp. Therefore it is called ‘piṇḍagrāha’.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

ye māṃ rūpeṇa adrākṣur ye māṃ ghoṣeṇa anvayuḥ mithyāprahāṇaprasṛtā na māṃ drakṣyanti te janāḥ draṣṭavyo dharmato buddho dharmakāyas tathāgataḥ dharmatā cāpy avijñeyā na sā śakyaṃ vijānituṃ //

tat kiṃ manyase subhūte lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhāḥ na khalu punaḥ subhūte evaṃ draṣṭavyaṃ na subhūte lakṣaṇasaṃpadā tathāgatenānuttarā samyaksaṃbodhir abhisaṃbuddhā| yat khalu punaḥ subhūte syād evaṃ bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitaiḥ kasyacid dharmasya vināśaḥ prajñapta ucchedo vā na khalu punaḥ subhūte evaṃ draṣṭavyaṃ | na bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitaiḥ kasyacid dharmasya vināśaḥ prajñapto nocchedaḥ yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā gaṃgānadīvālukopamāl lokadhātūn saptaratnapratipūrṇān kṛtvā tathāgatebhyo ‘rhadbhyaḥ samyaksaṃbuddhebhyo dānaṃ dadyād yaś ca bodhisatvo nirātmakeṣu dharmeṣu kṣāntiṃ pratilabheta | ayam eva tato bahutaraṃ puṇyaṃ prasaveta | na khalu punaḥ subhūte bodhisatvena puṇyaskandhaḥ parigrahītavyaḥ āha | puṇyaskandho bhagavan parigrahītavyaḥ bhagavān āha | parigrahītavyaḥ subhūte nodgrahītavyaḥ tenocyate parigrahītavyaḥ

api tu khalu punaḥ subhūte yaḥ kaścid evaṃ vadet tathāgato gacchati vāgacchati vā | tiṣṭhati vā niṣīdati vā śayyāṃ vā kalpayati | na me sa bhāṣitasyārtham ājānāti | tat kasya hetoḥ tathāgata iti subhūte na kutaścid āgato na kvacid gataḥ tenocyate tathāgato ‘rhan samyaksaṃbuddha iti | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā yāvantas trisāhasramahāsāhasre lokadhātau pṛthivīrajāṃsi tāvato lokadhātūn maṣiṃ kuryāt tadyathāpi nāma paramāṇusaṃcayas tat kiṃ manyase subhūte bahu sa paramāṇusaṃcayo bhavet āhaivam etad bhagavan bahu sa paramāṇusaṃcayo bhavet tat kasya hetoḥ saced bhagavan saṃcayo ‘bhaviṣyan na bhagavān avakṣyat paramāṇusaṃcaya iti | tat kasya hetoḥ yo ‘sau paramāṇusaṃcayo bhāṣitaḥ asaṃcayaḥ sa bhagavatā bhāṣitas tenocyate paramāṇusaṃcaya iti | yac ca tathāgato bhāṣati tṛsāhasramahāsāhasro lokadhātur iti | adhātuḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitas tenocyate trisāhasramahāsāhasro lokadhātur iti | tat kasya hetoḥ saced bhagavan dhātur abhaviṣyat sa eva bhagavan piṇḍagrāho ‘bhaviṣyad yaś caiva tathāgatena piṇḍagrāho bhāṣitaḥ agrāhaḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitas tenocyate piṇḍagrāha iti |

§§12

Translation

Bhagavān said:

Piṇḍagrāha (grasp of a substance), Subhūti, is indeed a conventional, inexpressible dharma (phenomenon). It is grasped by bālapṛthagjanas (foolish common people). For what reason? Whoever, Subhūti, should say thus: “An ātmadṛṣṭi (view of a self), a satvadṛṣṭi (view of a being), a jīvadṛṣṭi (view of a life-principle), a pudgaladṛṣṭi (view of a person) has been spoken of by the Tathāgata,” would he, Subhūti, be speaking correctly?

He said:

No, Bhagavān. For what reason? That which, Bhagavān, is the ātmadṛṣṭi spoken of by the Tathāgata, has been spoken of by the Tathāgata as a non-view. Therefore it is called ‘ātmadṛṣṭi’.

Bhagavān said:

Thus, Subhūti, by one who has set out in the bodhisatvayāna (bodhisatvayāna-way) are all dharmas (phenomena) to be known, to be convinced of. And they are to be convinced of in such a way that not even a dharmasaṃjñā (perception of a phenomenon) arises. For what reason? ‘Dharmasaṃjñā, ‘dharmasaṃjñā’, Subhūti, this is a no-perception spoken of by the Tathāgata. Therefore it is called ‘dharmasaṃjñā’. And furthermore, Subhūti, if a bodhisattva (enlightenment-being), a mahāsattva (great being), having filled immeasurable, innumerable lokadhātus (world-systems) with the seven precious things, were to give a gift, and if a kulaputra (son of good family) or kuladuhitṛ (daughter of good family), having taken from this Prajñāpāramitā at least a four-lined verse, were to uphold it, teach it, master it, this one would on that account generate much more puṇya (merit), immeasurable, innumerable. And how should one proclaim it? As a no-proclamation one should proclaim it. Therefore it is said ‘one should proclaim it’.

A star, darkness, a lamp,
an illusion, dew, a bubble,
A dream, a flash of lightning, and a cloud,
Thus should the saṃskṛta (conditioned) be seen.

This the Bhagavān spoke. The elder Subhūti, with a delighted mind, and those monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen, and the world with its gods, humans, asuras, and gandharvas, rejoiced in what the Bhagavān had said.

The Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā is completed.

Sanskrit (Roman IAST)

bhagavān āha | piṇḍagrāhaś caivāvyavahāro ‘nabhilāpyaḥ subhūte sa dharmaḥsa bālapṛthagjanair udgṛhītaḥ tat kasya hetoḥ yaḥ kaścit subhūte evaṃ vaded ātmadṛṣṭis tathāgatena bhāṣitā satvadṛṣṭir jīvadṛṣṭiḥ pudgaladṛṣṭiḥ api nu subhūte sa samyag vadan vadet āha | no bhagavaṃs tat kasya hetoḥ yā sā bhagavann ātmadṛṣṭis tathāgatena bhāṣitā adṛṣṭiḥ sā tathāgatena bhāṣitā tenocyate ātmadṛṣṭir iti | bhagavān āha | evaṃ subhūte bodhisatvayānasaṃprasthitena sarvadharmā jñātavyā adhimoktavyās tathā cādhimoktavyā yathā na dharmasaṃjñāpi pratyupatiṣṭhet tat kasya hetoḥ dharmasaṃjñā dharmasaṃjñeti subhūte asaṃjñaiṣā tathāgatena bhāṣitā tenocyate dharmasaṃjñeti | yaś ca khalu punaḥ subhūte bodhisatvo mahāsatvaḥ aprameyāsaṃkhyeyāl lokadhātūn saptaratnaparipūrṇān kṛtvā dānaṃ dadyād yaś ca kulaputro vā kuladuhitā vā itaḥ prajñāpāramitāyā antaśaś catuṣpadikām api gāthām udgṛhya dhārayed deśayet paryavāpnuyād ayam

eva tato bahutaraṃ puṇyaṃ prasavetāprameyam asaṃkhyeyaṃ | kaṭhaṃ ca saṃprakāśayed yathā na prakāśayet tenocyate saṃprakāśaye iti //

tārakā timiraṃ dīpo māyāvaśyāya budbudaḥ supinaṃ vidyud abhraṃ ca evaṃ draṣṭavya saṃskṛtaṃ //

idam avocad bhagavān āttamanā sthavirasubhūtis te ca bhikṣubhikṣuṇyupāsakopāsikāḥ sadevamānuṣāsuragandharvaś ca loko bhagavato bhāṣitam abhyanandan // //

vajracchedikā prajñāpāramitā samāptāḥ // //